Discusses Rochambeau Trail And 6 Commerce Road
To The Editor:
Last July, the BOS illegally discontinued Newtown’s Revolutionary War Trail, a public highway known as the undeveloped portion of Reservoir Road that’s listed on the National Registry of Historic places, which played a critical role in winning the Revolution after 4,700 French Troops traveled across it on their way to join General Washington at the Battle of Yorktown.
The BOS voted 2-1 in favor of granting a developer’s request to discontinue our historic asset, free of charge, so that he could maximize the profitability of a development he would like to build as close as 15 feet from the trail. According to the national historic registry nomination form, the significance of the section of Reservoir Road that’s listed on the National Registry as part of the Rochambeau march is not only that it was related to the march, but also that it retains its undisturbed 18th century landscape and character, which according to the CT State Archeologist, “can be adversely affected by adjacent development even without a direct impact”.
The BOS and the town of Newtown are being sued over this, not only because the process for road discontinuance decisions, which according to state statue, requires a public vote at a town meeting, wasn’t followed, but also because the BOS’ unilateral discontinuance decision permits a private developer to assume ownership of a valuable public historic asset without any compensation being offered or required, which is a clear violation of the first article of the CT Constitution.
Why did the First Selectman waste taxpayer money obtaining an appraisal of the public land at 6 Commerce Road, land that he and others tried unsuccessfully to sell to developers over the past 20+ years, but he never sought to determine the value of our Historic Revolutionary War Trail before voting to give it away for free, allowing it to be adversely impacted or destroyed, all for the financial benefit of a private developer?
Why did he write the governor, pointing out the appraised value of 6 Commerce Rd. when asking him to veto the bill designating it as open space, but he didn’t think to appraise our historic trail before handing it over to a private developer so he could build a $100 Million Dollar development next to it?
According to an appraiser who specializes in these types of real estate assets, our little section of historic trails is worth Millions to developers.
On behalf of hundreds of concerned residents living within 500 feet who signed protest petitions, and residents downstream who’s property and finances could also be negatively impacted, I ask the BOS to rescind the discontinuance decision now. Please do not spend more taxpayer money defending your actions in court. Why not get an appraisal and allow residents to make an informed decision about our valuable historic asset. The town attorney has already asked for two court continuances. Please don’t play the delay game any longer and make this the next BOS’ problem. Please make this right, now.
Dave Ackert
Sandy Hook
It’s important to clarify that while public process matters, so does the right of a property owner to reasonably develop land they legally own—especially when they follow the rules and engage with the town in good faith. The Board of Selectmen (BOS), whether one agrees with their decision or not, did not “give away” anything. The land in question was part of a road that had been unused and undeveloped for generations. There was no public access, no signage, and no infrastructure—just an overgrown path most residents never knew existed.
Mr. Ackert calls the discontinuance “illegal,” but state law grants municipalities the authority to discontinue roads, subject to procedural requirements. The fact that this matter is in litigation shows that questions of law are being properly addressed in court—not in letters to the editor. If the court finds procedural flaws, they’ll be corrected. That’s how the legal system works. Real solutions are found through public process and the courts, not through social media outrage.
What’s missing from this conversation is a recognition that towns need to balance many interests: history, environment, public access, private property rights, and economic development. And while the newly championed Revolutionary War heritage is important, there are also pressing modern realities: towns need housing, economic vitality, and responsible development. These things don’t happen in a vacuum—they require compromise, planning, and often, yes, change.
If residents truly wish to preserve this trail as public space, the appropriate path is through purchase, conservation easement, or formal designation—not by expecting private landowners to bear the burden of public sentiment. If the writer believes so strongly in its value, perhaps they might consider investing in its preservation themselves.
We can honor our history without freezing our town in time. Development and preservation aren’t mutually exclusive—but vilifying one side of the conversation only deepens division. Let’s focus on solutions that balance respect for the past with the rights and needs of those who live here now.